> Sounds like you're agreeing they are legally in murky territory.
Of course. As I said originally "This is clearly not a given". It's very unclear how this will be decided, but anyone who thinks that just because models contain copyrighted data they don't have a leg to stand on is very wrong. There are multiple good arguments and precedents to show that they do, depending on the circumstances.
Huh, I still interpret “this is clearly not a given” as a being contradictory reply to me saying it’s murky territory.
I think they contain massive amounts of copyrighted data, and reproduce them exactly, and that’s why they don’t have a leg to stand on. It’s a personal opinion, and I think backed by your citation. But thanks for the reference there, and glad to chat.
Further, new laws get made in reaction to new things whenever they push an existing doctrine beyond the original ruling, and these are certainly in that territory.